Thou shalt not....
Sorry, it's nearly Easter and I thought this was the ten commandments again
Barry Durex
Thread
Posts in chronological order
john bodega
"an elitist who has been part of a movement that has brought music to the eyes and ears of millions of people"
Hang on - which member of the band were you again?
You guys are looking for gratitude and recognition in the wrong places, man. At the end of the day, listeners will mostly see a collector who shares something as just a conduit. I hate to say it, but they're probably right about that too. You picked a thankless hobby. If you're still feeling indignant about a situation you should already be used to, then maybe it's time to re-evaluate why you're doing it in the first place.
You want thanks? You guys have mine! But if ingrates are getting you down, I have a pertinent news flash for you .. it's a big world with a lot of consumers in it that are probably a little busy consuming to think about where tidibt x came from.
For my part, I think it's awesome when a 'new' piece of music gets out. It's fascinating and fun to discuss. But I can live without it quite easily. Stop acting like the sky has fallen in because y'all got shafted by a wanker that you shouldn't have been dealing with in the first place.
... I mean seriously. Dave R Fuller? What made you think that was a bright idea??
Hang on - which member of the band were you again?
You guys are looking for gratitude and recognition in the wrong places, man. At the end of the day, listeners will mostly see a collector who shares something as just a conduit. I hate to say it, but they're probably right about that too. You picked a thankless hobby. If you're still feeling indignant about a situation you should already be used to, then maybe it's time to re-evaluate why you're doing it in the first place.
You want thanks? You guys have mine! But if ingrates are getting you down, I have a pertinent news flash for you .. it's a big world with a lot of consumers in it that are probably a little busy consuming to think about where tidibt x came from.
For my part, I think it's awesome when a 'new' piece of music gets out. It's fascinating and fun to discuss. But I can live without it quite easily. Stop acting like the sky has fallen in because y'all got shafted by a wanker that you shouldn't have been dealing with in the first place.
... I mean seriously. Dave R Fuller? What made you think that was a bright idea??
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
It's more like some people are asking questions and some are avoiding answering them. Whatever. [/QUOTE]
Very clear answers have been given. It just seems some people aren't content with them.
It's more like some people are asking questions and some are avoiding answering them. Whatever. [/QUOTE]
Very clear answers have been given. It just seems some people aren't content with them.
cmsdrums
I've read some really unbelievable stuff from some of the elitists here trying to justify ownership of the rare studio material in their collections as not being stolen property, simply because they got it second/third/fourth etc... down the line after it was 'liberated' from a studio or band member, and because they paid good money for it.
If someone hacks into one of the QPL servers/takes something from Brian's studio or house, raids the archives etc.. and takes a rare item, passes this onto someone else, then to someone else and then I find out and offer hard cash for it, would I really be able to state in public that I believe it to never have been stolen property? On the arguments of the elitists, absolutely I would! In fact, If I broke into their place, found a rare tape and copied the content whilst leaving the tape there, I should be even less bothered about this - the music wasn't created by them and was never theirs to start with, their tape is left there and so no crime is committed.
I don't mind what JSS says, or how innocent he FEELS or BELIEVES he is, the fact of the matter is that if he spends £5,000 on a rare studio tape, unless it was bought from QPL or EMI, or with their blessing, he still doesn't own the copyright to the music to do with as he feels - all he actually OWNS is a very expensive tape.
If someone hacks into one of the QPL servers/takes something from Brian's studio or house, raids the archives etc.. and takes a rare item, passes this onto someone else, then to someone else and then I find out and offer hard cash for it, would I really be able to state in public that I believe it to never have been stolen property? On the arguments of the elitists, absolutely I would! In fact, If I broke into their place, found a rare tape and copied the content whilst leaving the tape there, I should be even less bothered about this - the music wasn't created by them and was never theirs to start with, their tape is left there and so no crime is committed.
I don't mind what JSS says, or how innocent he FEELS or BELIEVES he is, the fact of the matter is that if he spends £5,000 on a rare studio tape, unless it was bought from QPL or EMI, or with their blessing, he still doesn't own the copyright to the music to do with as he feels - all he actually OWNS is a very expensive tape.
The Real Wizard
[QUOTE] [b]Zebonka12 wrote:[/b]
You guys are looking for gratitude and recognition in the wrong places, man. At the end of the day, listeners will mostly see a collector who shares something as just a conduit. I hate to say it, but they're probably right about that too. You picked a thankless hobby.
[/QUOTE]
As I stated above, I'm not looking for any recognition. And I fully realize that most people don't care who the middle man is. I'm fine with that, as are most collectors.
I'm just looking for neutrality - a space where collectors aren't slammed by ignorant self-appointed experts who have no idea of what they're talking about. But we're not in a perfect world, so I certainly won't expect any miracles.
So collectors will unearth new music, people will keep listening to it, and they'll be back in a few months or years to tell collectors what a bunch of attention-seeking whores they are. It seems it's a natural cycle now.
Enjoy!
You guys are looking for gratitude and recognition in the wrong places, man. At the end of the day, listeners will mostly see a collector who shares something as just a conduit. I hate to say it, but they're probably right about that too. You picked a thankless hobby.
[/QUOTE]
As I stated above, I'm not looking for any recognition. And I fully realize that most people don't care who the middle man is. I'm fine with that, as are most collectors.
I'm just looking for neutrality - a space where collectors aren't slammed by ignorant self-appointed experts who have no idea of what they're talking about. But we're not in a perfect world, so I certainly won't expect any miracles.
So collectors will unearth new music, people will keep listening to it, and they'll be back in a few months or years to tell collectors what a bunch of attention-seeking whores they are. It seems it's a natural cycle now.
Enjoy!
Sebastian
Fair point, but if so, everybody who's watched/listened to DRF's recent leaks is also doing something wrong, as it was obtained immorally (even if it's not technically illegal in that case ... or is it?).
Zeb: I fully agree.
Zeb: I fully agree.
Holly2003
[QUOTE] [b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
It's more like some people are asking questions and some are avoiding answering them. Whatever. [/QUOTE]
Very clear answers have been given. It just seems some people aren't content with them.[/QUOTE]
Sure. Like the following exchange with JSS (I'm paraphrasing):
JSS: After a few shares between private collectors, rare stuff is more likely to be shared on Queenzone.
Me: Just a few shares? So how many times were the Reaction songs shared and how long were were you sitting on them?
JSS; I'm not saying.
Me: Has Hangman ever been shared?
JSS: I;m not saying.
Yes very open and clear :) You guys keep rare stuff out of Queen fans' hands until you've got every last bit of value out of it. Why bother denying it? You've already bloody admitted it a few times! lol. And that's fine. And if JSS doesn't want to talk about his collection fair enough. I could care less really. But let's not pretend you're all angels and let's not have any more talk about leechers, parasites, beggars etc. You are asking for balance while giving only one side of the story yourself.
[QUOTE] [b]Holly2003 wrote:[/b]
It's more like some people are asking questions and some are avoiding answering them. Whatever. [/QUOTE]
Very clear answers have been given. It just seems some people aren't content with them.[/QUOTE]
Sure. Like the following exchange with JSS (I'm paraphrasing):
JSS: After a few shares between private collectors, rare stuff is more likely to be shared on Queenzone.
Me: Just a few shares? So how many times were the Reaction songs shared and how long were were you sitting on them?
JSS; I'm not saying.
Me: Has Hangman ever been shared?
JSS: I;m not saying.
Yes very open and clear :) You guys keep rare stuff out of Queen fans' hands until you've got every last bit of value out of it. Why bother denying it? You've already bloody admitted it a few times! lol. And that's fine. And if JSS doesn't want to talk about his collection fair enough. I could care less really. But let's not pretend you're all angels and let's not have any more talk about leechers, parasites, beggars etc. You are asking for balance while giving only one side of the story yourself.
mooghead
This is boring now... ultimately everyone is arguing about stolen property. You can have it. Put your ego's in the safe with it. Keep it to yourselves. We don't want it.
End of thread.
End of thread.
Gaabiizz
Okay , have a private collection, so you can also get new material . No private collection, no trade , so there is NOTHING NEW.
The collecting world will not end ever , but it would be good from time to time that of disclosed at least one demo . Is only an opinion, after all, is your material
The collecting world will not end ever , but it would be good from time to time that of disclosed at least one demo . Is only an opinion, after all, is your material
john bodega
"I'm just looking for neutrality"
Neutrality is a little different from a one-size-fits-all way of looking at where rarities come from, which is what JSS would probably prefer. Maybe he doesn't like to think that anything he has or has owned in the past came to him (somewhere along the line) through dubious means, but it's a distinct possibility.
I mean, I don't know any collectors names, but who was it that leaked Brian's Elvis track a few years ago? Judging by Brian's reaction, that plainly was NOT an authorised bit of trading. We're supposed to trust a collector's opinion of what was rightfully purchased or obtained over that of the guy *in the band*??
That's just one issue where 'neutrality' sounds like a license to let people do what they want without any kind of criticism. Might not be what you're suggesting, but if it gets construed that way then you might want to rephrase what it is you really want.
"ignorant self-appointed experts"
In other words, collectors!
In some cases they're ignorant of the legal and moral implications of what they're holding (perhaps willfully ignorant? Or some kind of denial?). Self-appointed? You bet! 'Experts'? Who knows.
What I'm probably failing to get across to you guys is that it's not always clear cut. JSS can't just waltz around saying "I bought all this stuff and it's all ok". Some of it probably isn't ok, and it irks me that he'd rather not confront that possibility - just the same as it irks me when Dave Fuller does something wrong. Am I too hung up on the ethics here?
The very least y'all can do is acknowledge the greyness of the domain you're wandering around in and accept that really - VERY LITTLE separates you and the rest of us. If anything at all. 'Gold, silver, bronze'. Seriously? Reminds me of that episode of Frasier where Niles kicks him out of the wine club.
If you guys want any kind of remotely neutral environment where you're judged on your merits, you had better start displaying some merits. What makes a listener a parasite, exactly, but a collector noble? The money spent?? Give me a break. That's a flimsy justification at best. Tell yourselves whatever you have to in order to be comfortable with your purchases, but don't treat the rest of the world like shit just because they like the same band as you.
I mean really, I see that 'parasite' word thrown around and it makes me laugh. Reminds me of someone - oh wait, Brian May. Said of His Latest Flame: ' I'm not at all happy that it should be out there earning money for some parasite as a bootleg.'
I'm fairly sure he's not aiming that solely at us casual fans.
Neutrality is a little different from a one-size-fits-all way of looking at where rarities come from, which is what JSS would probably prefer. Maybe he doesn't like to think that anything he has or has owned in the past came to him (somewhere along the line) through dubious means, but it's a distinct possibility.
I mean, I don't know any collectors names, but who was it that leaked Brian's Elvis track a few years ago? Judging by Brian's reaction, that plainly was NOT an authorised bit of trading. We're supposed to trust a collector's opinion of what was rightfully purchased or obtained over that of the guy *in the band*??
That's just one issue where 'neutrality' sounds like a license to let people do what they want without any kind of criticism. Might not be what you're suggesting, but if it gets construed that way then you might want to rephrase what it is you really want.
"ignorant self-appointed experts"
In other words, collectors!
In some cases they're ignorant of the legal and moral implications of what they're holding (perhaps willfully ignorant? Or some kind of denial?). Self-appointed? You bet! 'Experts'? Who knows.
What I'm probably failing to get across to you guys is that it's not always clear cut. JSS can't just waltz around saying "I bought all this stuff and it's all ok". Some of it probably isn't ok, and it irks me that he'd rather not confront that possibility - just the same as it irks me when Dave Fuller does something wrong. Am I too hung up on the ethics here?
The very least y'all can do is acknowledge the greyness of the domain you're wandering around in and accept that really - VERY LITTLE separates you and the rest of us. If anything at all. 'Gold, silver, bronze'. Seriously? Reminds me of that episode of Frasier where Niles kicks him out of the wine club.
If you guys want any kind of remotely neutral environment where you're judged on your merits, you had better start displaying some merits. What makes a listener a parasite, exactly, but a collector noble? The money spent?? Give me a break. That's a flimsy justification at best. Tell yourselves whatever you have to in order to be comfortable with your purchases, but don't treat the rest of the world like shit just because they like the same band as you.
I mean really, I see that 'parasite' word thrown around and it makes me laugh. Reminds me of someone - oh wait, Brian May. Said of His Latest Flame: ' I'm not at all happy that it should be out there earning money for some parasite as a bootleg.'
I'm fairly sure he's not aiming that solely at us casual fans.
john bodega
PS. I'm only saying this because I love you all.
brians wig
[QUOTE] [b]4 x Vision wrote:[/b]
[QUOTE] [b]brians wig wrote:[/b]
Do you know what?
I'd absolutely LOVE us all to live in a world where we all shared our collections freely, but[/QUOTE]
Then why don't you BW? If I LOVE to do something, I just do it! Lifes too short to spend 17 years doing something you hate doing (it's the oppositie of 'love' so i'm taking some liberties here lol).[/QUOTE]
Well, quite simply if someone gives me a recording (whether it be a concert they've taped themselves or a 'rarity') and asks me not to trade it or share it, my own morals tell me not to break that promise and that brings us full circle to the whole thing that started off this last week of discussion: Mr Fuller pure and simply broke his promise.
[QUOTE] [b]brians wig wrote:[/b]
Do you know what?
I'd absolutely LOVE us all to live in a world where we all shared our collections freely, but[/QUOTE]
Then why don't you BW? If I LOVE to do something, I just do it! Lifes too short to spend 17 years doing something you hate doing (it's the oppositie of 'love' so i'm taking some liberties here lol).[/QUOTE]
Well, quite simply if someone gives me a recording (whether it be a concert they've taped themselves or a 'rarity') and asks me not to trade it or share it, my own morals tell me not to break that promise and that brings us full circle to the whole thing that started off this last week of discussion: Mr Fuller pure and simply broke his promise.
GratefulFan
[QUOTE]
[b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b] But the difference between the two sides is - one of them is basing their comments on experience in the subject being discussed, whereas the other thinks they know what they're talking about despite having no experience.[/QUOTE]
Being close to something sacrifices the perspective of distance. So everybody is a bit blind. And you don't need to work in the Department of Intergovernmental Waste or whatever to have an informed opinion on the effectiveness of a system of management. People can look at results and make inferences about process.
[b]The Real Wizard wrote:[/b] But the difference between the two sides is - one of them is basing their comments on experience in the subject being discussed, whereas the other thinks they know what they're talking about despite having no experience.[/QUOTE]
Being close to something sacrifices the perspective of distance. So everybody is a bit blind. And you don't need to work in the Department of Intergovernmental Waste or whatever to have an informed opinion on the effectiveness of a system of management. People can look at results and make inferences about process.
tcc
[QUOTE]
[b]Zebonka12 wrote: [/b] "I'm just looking for neutrality"
Neutrality is a little different from a one-size-fits-all way of looking at where rarities come from, which is what JSS would probably prefer. Maybe he doesn't like to think that anything he has or has owned in the past came to him (somewhere along the line) through dubious means, but it's a distinct possibility.
I mean, I don't know any collectors names, but who was it that leaked Brian's Elvis track a few years ago? Judging by Brian's reaction, that plainly was NOT an authorised bit of trading. We're supposed to trust a collector's opinion of what was rightfully purchased or obtained over that of the guy *in the band*??
That's just one issue where 'neutrality' sounds like a license to let people do what they want without any kind of criticism. Might not be what you're suggesting, but if it gets construed that way then you might want to rephrase what it is you really want.
"ignorant self-appointed experts"
In other words, collectors!
In some cases they're ignorant of the legal and moral implications of what they're holding (perhaps willfully ignorant? Or some kind of denial?). Self-appointed? You bet! 'Experts'? Who knows.
What I'm probably failing to get across to you guys is that it's not always clear cut. JSS can't just waltz around saying "I bought all this stuff and it's all ok". Some of it probably isn't ok, and it irks me that he'd rather not confront that possibility - just the same as it irks me when Dave Fuller does something wrong. Am I too hung up on the ethics here?
The very least y'all can do is acknowledge the greyness of the domain you're wandering around in and accept that really - VERY LITTLE separates you and the rest of us. If anything at all. 'Gold, silver, bronze'. Seriously? Reminds me of that episode of Frasier where Niles kicks him out of the wine club.
If you guys want any kind of remotely neutral environment where you're judged on your merits, you had better start displaying some merits. What makes a listener a parasite, exactly, but a collector noble? The money spent?? Give me a break. That's a flimsy justification at best. Tell yourselves whatever you have to in order to be comfortable with your purchases, but don't treat the rest of the world like shit just because they like the same band as you.
I mean really, I see that 'parasite' word thrown around and it makes me laugh. Reminds me of someone - oh wait, Brian May. Said of His Latest Flame: ' I'm not at all happy that it should be out there earning money for some parasite as a bootleg.'
I'm fairly sure he's not aiming that solely at us casual fans.[/QUOTE]
In view of what you have said, are you recommending that the collectors should just keep everything to themselves and not share it at all ?
[b]Zebonka12 wrote: [/b] "I'm just looking for neutrality"
Neutrality is a little different from a one-size-fits-all way of looking at where rarities come from, which is what JSS would probably prefer. Maybe he doesn't like to think that anything he has or has owned in the past came to him (somewhere along the line) through dubious means, but it's a distinct possibility.
I mean, I don't know any collectors names, but who was it that leaked Brian's Elvis track a few years ago? Judging by Brian's reaction, that plainly was NOT an authorised bit of trading. We're supposed to trust a collector's opinion of what was rightfully purchased or obtained over that of the guy *in the band*??
That's just one issue where 'neutrality' sounds like a license to let people do what they want without any kind of criticism. Might not be what you're suggesting, but if it gets construed that way then you might want to rephrase what it is you really want.
"ignorant self-appointed experts"
In other words, collectors!
In some cases they're ignorant of the legal and moral implications of what they're holding (perhaps willfully ignorant? Or some kind of denial?). Self-appointed? You bet! 'Experts'? Who knows.
What I'm probably failing to get across to you guys is that it's not always clear cut. JSS can't just waltz around saying "I bought all this stuff and it's all ok". Some of it probably isn't ok, and it irks me that he'd rather not confront that possibility - just the same as it irks me when Dave Fuller does something wrong. Am I too hung up on the ethics here?
The very least y'all can do is acknowledge the greyness of the domain you're wandering around in and accept that really - VERY LITTLE separates you and the rest of us. If anything at all. 'Gold, silver, bronze'. Seriously? Reminds me of that episode of Frasier where Niles kicks him out of the wine club.
If you guys want any kind of remotely neutral environment where you're judged on your merits, you had better start displaying some merits. What makes a listener a parasite, exactly, but a collector noble? The money spent?? Give me a break. That's a flimsy justification at best. Tell yourselves whatever you have to in order to be comfortable with your purchases, but don't treat the rest of the world like shit just because they like the same band as you.
I mean really, I see that 'parasite' word thrown around and it makes me laugh. Reminds me of someone - oh wait, Brian May. Said of His Latest Flame: ' I'm not at all happy that it should be out there earning money for some parasite as a bootleg.'
I'm fairly sure he's not aiming that solely at us casual fans.[/QUOTE]
In view of what you have said, are you recommending that the collectors should just keep everything to themselves and not share it at all ?
john bodega
I wouldn't like that, but it would not be the end of the world if they did. If they're hung up on releasing things in a time and manner of their own choosing, then they should be more careful about the friends they make.